Author Topic: F-105 Thunderchief  (Read 20230 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline elmayerle

  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 6355
Re: F-105 Thunderchief
« Reply #15 on: November 30, 2006, 04:21:41 pm »
Quote
I understand the Thud had a loooonggg take of run, so maybe blown wings?
Hence the old line, "If someone built a runway around the world, Republic would build an aircraft that would need every inch of it."

SEriously, either blown flaps/slats or a just plain larger wing.  I rather suspect that blowing the existing wing would be quite a design challenge in itself.
"Reality is the leading cause of stress amongst those in touch with it."
--Jane Wagner and Lily Tomlin

Offline tigercat2

  • Scratchbuilds the entire model
  • ****
  • Posts: 741
Re: F-105 Thunderchief
« Reply #16 on: November 30, 2006, 07:02:27 pm »
In the book by David Anderton, "The Republic F-105 Thunderchief", he talks about several proposals that Republic had for F-105 developments.

One was to replace the J-75 engine with a newer version, designated the JT4B-24 (P&W designation) that had 30K of thrust, compared to the J-75's 26.5K.

In 1962, Republic proposed to take the 450 F-105Ds in service then, add a fuselage stretch for the 2nd seat, add a 220 gallon fuel tank under that seat, install the big engine, beef up the landing gear and that would be called the F-105G.  All follow-on aircraft ( the FY 62 and 63 models)  would also be built to this standard.    This was never adopted,despite an estimated cost of $714K  to convert the existing aircraft to this standard, and probably $3M for each new build.


In late 1962 or early 1963, Republic proposed the F-105H, with a new wing of 448 square feet, two seats, new landing gear, vertical fin, stabilator, new nose, etc.  This was really a new design, and the USAF did not go for it.

Finally, in 1968, with only 344 F-105Ds remaining, Republic proposed adding the Thunderstick II system to all the aircraft, more fuel, new pylons and a few other changes to create an F-105D-35 model.  This would have cost $1.8M per aircraft, but of course the USAF did not go for it.


Wes W.

 

Offline MAD

  • Scratchbuilds the entire model
  • ****
  • Posts: 729
Re: F-105 Thunderchief
« Reply #17 on: November 30, 2006, 09:43:24 pm »
[/QUOTE]In late 1962 or early 1963, Republic proposed the F-105H, with a new wing of 448 square feet, two seats, new landing gear, vertical fin, stabilator, new nose, etc. This was really a new design, and the USAF did not go for it.
Quote
Quote
Wes W.


Does anyone have a drawing or artwork of the proposed F-105H, especially a 3-view drawing would be great


M.A.D.

Offline Archibald

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 4983
Re: F-105 Thunderchief
« Reply #18 on: November 30, 2006, 11:53:21 pm »
what solution to shorten the take off run ?
F-104-like wings, but much scaled up (you can add flaps on those wings no ?)
 Of course you can also try a delta (but no improvements on take off run would occure in this case).
Delta wing with Fieri intakes  :wub:
I'm asking If the tornado IDS radar could fit in a Thud nose ?
This TF-41 (as the spey) was really a missed opportunity
http://www.whatifmodelers.com/forum//index...12588&hl=medway

 
King Arthur: Can we come up and have a look?
French Soldier: Of course not. You're English types.
King Arthur: What are you then?
French Soldier: I'm French. Why do you think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king?

Well regardless I would rather take my chance out there on the ocean, that to stay here and die on this poo-hole island spending the rest of my life talking to a gosh darn VOLLEYBALL.

Alvis 3.1

  • Guest
Re: F-105 Thunderchief
« Reply #19 on: December 01, 2006, 01:07:55 am »
Quote
Quote
I understand the Thud had a loooonggg take of run, so maybe blown wings?
Hence the old line, "If someone built a runway around the world, Republic would build an aircraft that would need every inch of it."

SEriously, either blown flaps/slats or a just plain larger wing.  I rather suspect that blowing the existing wing would be quite a design challenge in itself.
What exactly WAS with Republic and the excessive take-off run issue? You'd think they would have learned from the F-84 and its bad reputation of plowing dirt at the end of takeoff runs. Weird.




Alvis 3.1

Offline upnorth

  • I like Faireys
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 2059
Re: F-105 Thunderchief
« Reply #20 on: December 01, 2006, 02:28:21 am »
Quote
For myself I would also ditch the intergral airbrakes/exhaust nozzle design, go for a more straightforward design of nozzle and reposition the air brakes (not sure where though, would putting them on the upper rear portion of the airframe be aerodynamically acceptable, or perhaps one big F-15 style unit on the upper fuselage behind the canopy?)  :huh:

 
I don't think the repositioning of the airbrakes needs to be so radical as that.

The way I think, keep the four airbrakes, but move them to a spot on the rear fuselage between the tail pipe and the trailing edge of the wing.

Basically, I'm envisioning an arrangement in the vein of what the TSR.2 and Sukhoi SU-17 and SU-22 "Fitters" had.

Alternately, you could go with an arrangement like the MiG-21 had; with a small airbrake on the underside centreline aft of the weapons pylon and two larger ones on either side of the centreline just ahead of the pylon.

As for the long runway needed; how about a thrust reverser system for landings instead of the parachute?

Offline Archibald

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 4983
Re: F-105 Thunderchief
« Reply #21 on: December 01, 2006, 03:11:47 am »
No need for the F-111! we want more F-105s, TSR-2 in australian markings, we need the tomcat earlier (no bloody F-111B!) !!!!!!!!! ^_^
we need the TF-41, not the crappy TF-30!!!

Another thread here
http://www.whatifmodelers.com/forum//index...ader,and,tomcat ^_^

I try to mention olds thread to complement this one!



 
King Arthur: Can we come up and have a look?
French Soldier: Of course not. You're English types.
King Arthur: What are you then?
French Soldier: I'm French. Why do you think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king?

Well regardless I would rather take my chance out there on the ocean, that to stay here and die on this poo-hole island spending the rest of my life talking to a gosh darn VOLLEYBALL.

Offline AeroplaneDriver

  • Not licensed to do this sort of thing
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 3708
  • Busy repainting the Jetstream in Red Arrows colors
Re: F-105 Thunderchief
« Reply #22 on: December 01, 2006, 03:47:44 am »
Love the Thud upgrade ideas!  I'd really love to see one in allover Gunship gray carrying a massive load of Rockeyes a'la Gulf War Strike Eagles.

As for the takeoff run...I used to work for a former Thud Driver (first person to eject from one too-engine fire over Kansas) who said they carried a bag of rocks with them.  When the end fo the runway was repidly approaching they would throw the rocks out, the plane would run over them and think it was going off the end of the runway and leap into the air just in time.  :lol:  
Don't move!  You're surrounded by armed bastards!

Why petril not burn?

Offline elmayerle

  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 6355
Re: F-105 Thunderchief
« Reply #23 on: December 03, 2006, 10:42:30 pm »
Interesting  you should mention that, I was at Cessna-Pawnee when a Thud with engine problems had the bloody thing quit on final (the engine had been giving peculiar data since shortly after takeoff and the pilot decided RTD was a real good plna).  It plowed quite a furrow, but was jacked up, trucked to the shop, and completely repaired to fly again.

If I was going to enlarge the wing, I'd go with something like the 1/48 wing mated to 1/72 inlets for a 1/72 model (Hmm, come to think of it, I've got most of those components...)
"Reality is the leading cause of stress amongst those in touch with it."
--Jane Wagner and Lily Tomlin

Offline rallymodeller

  • keeps his nose hair trimmed
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 1738
  • CF-100 fanboy, race driver and caucasian otaku
    • Leading Edge 3D
Re: F-105 Thunderchief
« Reply #24 on: December 03, 2006, 11:56:39 pm »
Trouble with scaling up the wing is that with the small wing the Thud had really high wing loading making it rock steady at low altitude and high speed, exactly it's mission. Same goes for the Voodoo (in many ways the RF-101 was far superior to the RF-4),  Jaguar and (for different reasons but same result) the Starfighter. Increase the wing size, you lower the wing loading and make the ride much rougher.  
--Jeremy

Poor planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part...


More into Flight Sim reskinning these days, but still what-iffing... Leading Edge 3D

Offline Archibald

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 4983
Re: F-105 Thunderchief
« Reply #25 on: December 04, 2006, 12:18:21 am »
The Mirage IIIR had a delta wing but it had a small area (35 sq meter)

 
King Arthur: Can we come up and have a look?
French Soldier: Of course not. You're English types.
King Arthur: What are you then?
French Soldier: I'm French. Why do you think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king?

Well regardless I would rather take my chance out there on the ocean, that to stay here and die on this poo-hole island spending the rest of my life talking to a gosh darn VOLLEYBALL.

Offline AeroplaneDriver

  • Not licensed to do this sort of thing
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 3708
  • Busy repainting the Jetstream in Red Arrows colors
Re: F-105 Thunderchief
« Reply #26 on: December 04, 2006, 03:29:20 am »
Quote
Trouble with scaling up the wing is that with the small wing the Thud had really high wing loading making it rock steady at low altitude and high speed, exactly it's mission. Same goes for the Voodoo (in many ways the RF-101 was far superior to the RF-4),  Jaguar and (for different reasons but same result) the Starfighter. Increase the wing size, you lower the wing loading and make the ride much rougher.
Hmmmm.....Voodoo-winged F-105?  

A Thoodoo?  
Thunderdoo?
Don't move!  You're surrounded by armed bastards!

Why petril not burn?

Offline Archibald

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 4983
Re: F-105 Thunderchief
« Reply #27 on: December 04, 2006, 04:11:01 am »
Aerplane-san, that's a very good idea! Hmm whatif F-101, F-104, F-105 and Phantoms echanged their wings (and intakes if necessary ?)  
King Arthur: Can we come up and have a look?
French Soldier: Of course not. You're English types.
King Arthur: What are you then?
French Soldier: I'm French. Why do you think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king?

Well regardless I would rather take my chance out there on the ocean, that to stay here and die on this poo-hole island spending the rest of my life talking to a gosh darn VOLLEYBALL.

Offline elmayerle

  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 6355
Re: F-105 Thunderchief
« Reply #28 on: December 04, 2006, 10:14:34 pm »
Well, I didn't think my scale-up would change the wing-loading enough to make it bad in low-level ops (I mean the RA-5C did quite well at low-level with a lower wing loading, as I remember it was the only other aircraft over 'Nam capable of sea-level mach+ performance).

Now, once upon a time, years and years ago, I saw a proposal for increasing the wing area of the F-105 for takeoff via modified wing tips, outboard of the outer-most hardpoints, that would unfold to add wing area and span for takeoff.

Now, considering that the F-105's equivalent was the Su-7, I wonder if a vg set-up similar to that of the Su-22 would work?  The somewhat stalky main gear would be a problem, but not an insurmountable one.
"Reality is the leading cause of stress amongst those in touch with it."
--Jane Wagner and Lily Tomlin

Offline GTX

  • Beyond The Sprues Guy
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 10820
  • "Princess"
    • www.beyondthesprues.com/Forum
Re: F-105 Thunderchief
« Reply #29 on: December 04, 2006, 11:25:06 pm »
A VG Thud - hmmm!

Regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!